5 ms·
Environmentalists are not wedded to a low-energy ideal, they're wedded to a non-polluting one. Speaking for myself, I'd be happy with, say, a P-B aneutronic fus
by astazangasta 11y ago
Environmentalists are not wedded to a low-energy ideal, they're wedded to a non-polluting one. Speaking for myself, I'd be happy with, say, a P-B aneutronic fusion system and would vastly prefer this over solar or wind. But we don't have this right now, and solar or wind are the least polluting alternatives, and considerably cheaper to develop than nuclear options.
- TeMPOraL 11y agoNuclear is pretty much non-polluting as well. People overestimate how much waste is being created in the plants; it's entirely manageable and you can easily store it without (barring accidents) having it interact in any way with the environment, patiently waiting to be reused as nuclear fuel in the next generation of reactors.
- DennisP 11y agoI'm a fan of aneutronic fusion but lacking that I'd be pretty happy with molten salt reactors, like what Transatomic, ThorCon, Terrestrial Energy, and Moltex are doing. They'd be inherently safe, proliferation-resistant, and produce very little long-term waste. These aren't commercially available yet but they just need straightforward development, not any fundamental breakthroughs.
- guscost 11y ago> solar or wind are the least polluting alternatives Not even close, but unless you live in mainland China you don't see the pollution. http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20150402-the-worst-place-on-earth http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20150402-the-worst-place-on-... http://spectrum.ieee.org/green-tech/solar/solar-energy-isnt-always-as-green-as-you-think http://spectrum.ieee.org/green-tech/solar/solar-energy-isnt-...
- astazangasta 11y agoYeah I'm not happy about PV, but there are solar systems that are not as polluting (solar concentrating systems, heating systems), and wind systems are relatively inert compared to PV or nuclear.